Dove’s still keepin’ it real, and by real I mean an unrealistic, retouched kind of real.
Dove’s ‘Real Beauty’ Pics Could Be Big Phonies?
In a May 12 profile in The New Yorker posted online, Pascal Dangin of New York’s Box Studios is quoted as saying he extensively retouched photos used in the Campaign for Real Beauty, which, if true, could seriously undermine an effort that already has subjected Unilever to considerable consumer and activist backlash in recent months.
The best quote of all?
“I mentioned the Dove ad campaign that proudly featured lumpier-than-usual ‘real women’ in their undergarments,” wrote Lauren Collins in the New Yorker article. “It turned out that it was a Dangin job. ‘Do you know how much retouching was on that?’ he asked. ‘But it was great to do, a challenge, to keep everyone’s skin and faces showing the mileage but not looking unattractive.’”
This comes after Dove has maintained there was no retouching done to the images. Their response is that Pascal Dangin is a liar.
The Shameless Blog has talked extensively about the controversy behind this campaign, namely the hypocrisy of an “accept yourself as you are” and “beware unrealistic marketing” ad hook produced by the same company that brings us female sex slave imagery. Again, it seems that accepting yourself the way you are still involves a lot of retouching.
“No wonder our perception of beauty is distorted.” Um, yah.
Digg
Facebook
del.icio.us
three comments
This just makes me SEETHING mad.
I could never believe this campaign from the beginning, I even did research on the company that owns Dove.
But I was told that I was paranoid,
I was pretty much told that I should put my trust in this company, and be thankful for the campaign.
I'm disgusted.
Posted by Sarah
May 8, 2008, 4:51 PM
I used to believe that this campaign was something good, but after a while my mind wandered. Why did their skin look so flawless? Why did the pro-age woman look so...young? Why are they making firming products if we are to "make peace with our bodies"?
Posted by Brianne
May 8, 2008, 5:45 PM
Unilever responded to this today along with Dangin, saying the quotations in questions were taken out of context. The New Yorker, they claim, got it wrong.
According to a statement, Dangin never worked on the Real Beauty photographs in question, but on the Pro Age campaign that followed in 2007.
Unilever maintains that the Real Beauty photos were altered only to "remove dust" and for colour correction, a standard practice in commercial photography.
Posted by Jeromy Lloyd
May 9, 2008, 4:06 PM
Leave a comment
This blog post is older than 90 days old. All comments submitted regarding this post will be automatically held for review by the editors before posting. Your comment will not appear on the site until it has been approved.
Our comment policy
Shameless prides itself on the diversity of opinions expressed by our writers, and we encourage and appreciate different points of view. Our intention at Shameless is to foster community and to maintain a safe and positive blogging environment; we do not consider it our duty to give a voice to anybody with an opinion.
Discussion on this site is moderated. We will delete comments that:
(We get to decide what's discriminatory, hateful, attacking, or inflammatory).
In some cases, we will cap off comments on a discussion when we feel they are spiralling out of control and fostering an unwelcoming space for bloggers and readers. Comments will be closed by the Web Editor, unless the post is by the Web Editor, in which case the Editor in Chief will close them.
If your comments repeatedly make the same point, they may be deleted. This also applies to comments made by multiple members of the same organization.
Your comments should be about the topic of the post, not its writer—although we certainly encourage praise for our writers, if you want to say something nice.